About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)
got elected on this time and what was most present in the populous mind is he needs to stay strong on what he was elected on and what he said he was going to do. host: this is from the facebook page. the question is, what do you think the president pose a number one priority should be. brian is joining us from texas on the republican line. caller: good morning. i am down here in texas and we voted the other way. the number one thing i see is jobs. you have economic growth, you have money to in the system moving. getting to the people that need it, not the people sitting in washington, d.c. i was just listening to what mr. obama was hanged and all of the things he promised in 2008, and now with a new election, and demanded, raising taxes and $1.60 trillion in texas. how is that going to help anybody? people do not have the money now. where are we going to get it? coming from the government, everybody thinks that are entitled to something. thank you for the call. the top solution is to break the congressional gridlock. north dakota on the democrats' line. caller: good morning. the nu
for every $1.50 in revenue. yet you saw the only proposal come from him sense the election was four dollars in revenue for one dollar in cuts. it was $1.6 trillion in revenue and $400 trillion in cuts and $300 trillion in additional stimulus spending in addition to that. but completely the opposite in cracks to his own campaign pledge. what we've been trying to do, greta, is hold his feet to the fire and say speaker bain wares clear the day after the election. he said mr. president, you won, but so did we. the mandate we have is to work together. we are willing to honor your ledge pledge of $80 billion a year from the wealthiest, which is what you said during the campaign, the $800 billion, but we need the $2.50 for every one dollar in cuts and the president has been completely unwilling to specify those cuts. >> here's your problem. other than the snapshot of the president in swim trunks in hawaii while we go off the fiscal cliff, which is a bad photo op, or if he delays his trip for two days but sends his family off so we are paying for few flights to hawaii, other than that, what do you
that president was in cambodia right after the election. he was in burma. secretary clinton moved widely throughout the region as does secretary panetta. and the amount of activities that i do and my forces do have been a prompt jump in what we've done in the past, and we're looking for opportunities to do more exercise. we're doing more of those things already. i think it's visible to our allies. i think it's visible to our partners. not to be invisible to the region. we also want to jump, where's the next summary our aircraft carrier, that's always the sake of. and we will, over time as you heard secretary panetta said, we will rebalance our navy towards the pacific, and i party mentioned in my opening remarks, we are rapidly moving our most capable assets in the region because of some of the ballistic missile defense will be facing of those types of things. so i think it's not about one thing. it's about a holistic approach, and what if you on the military side is only one aspect of a. it's got to be tied to what's happening in the economic side in what's happening in the diplomatic s
do well. having said that, welcome again, mr. secretary. just days after the president's re-election, the f.h.a. released its 2012 actuarial report which revealed that the economic value of the f.h.a. fund has fallen to negative $16 billion. a lot of money. that means the fund's capital reserve ratio, as i understand it, now stands at a negative 1.44%. this news is obviously very disturbing to us and to the secretary. for those of us who have long been concerned about the health of the f.h.a. for years the problems of the federal housing administration have been well-known. during the housing boom, the f.h.a. unweissly, i thought, guaranteed -- unwisely, i thought, guaranteed millions of risky mortgages with low down payments to borrowers with poor credit scores. we are reaping that now. these mortgages have resulted in billions of losses to the f.h.a. the federal housing administration has made matters worse, i think, by failing to come to grips with the magnitude, mr. secretary, of the problems. back in 2007, as the federal housing administration's poor financial position was becom
for the introduction. last week at the right house, we had our first meeting since the election. it was a chance for me to banks -- thank my entire team for their service for keeping the country safe and strong. few have done more than you in that regard. that includes taking care of our remarkable men and women in uniform and their families. keeping our military the best in the world bar none. thank you for being such an outstanding secretary of defense. [applause] i am not here to give a big speech. i wanted to come by and join you in marking the 20th anniversary of one of the country's smartest and most successful national security programs. people in this room conceived it and build it. i want to a knowledge a leader who now helps guide the secretary of defense. thank you for your great work. [applause] you have to think about what real visionaries do. you look at the world and see what is missing. they set out to fill the gap. to build something new. to imagine after decades of confrontation how our nations might engage in cooperation. early in the cold war, einstein warned of the danger of our wi
a dozen tea party-like conservatives elected. >> let me jump in, dana. i want to run through them because, you know, when we think senator demint we think of a tea party stronghold within the u.s. senate and helped and also hurt a number of republican candidates. who were they? >> reporter: that's right. great. let's start with the senators now. obviously, who he helped elect. this is the positive side of his millions and his work. marco rubio, pat toomey. very conservative, anti-tax, anti-government purists in the mold of jim demint. however, he also backed in republican primaries a number of republican candidates who simply were not electable according to the republican establishment and the establishment was right. for example, remember christine o'donnell, i'm not a witch, from delaware. ken buck of colorado. and others. so those are some of the reasons why he definitely has ruffled many a-feather with the party leaders and i have to tell you first thing i saw when the senate republican leader mitch mcconnell released a statement today was making the point that demint had, quote, unco
to be reformed. for decades we have been electing politicians will tell us what we want to hear, but we cannot pay for the programs we want. until the american people themselves can deal with the truth, we're not going to solve this. contacting our politicians, offering sacrifice of the programs we like is the only solution. until then, politicians will not have the courage to cut the programs that we simply tell them not to touch. host: here is the editorial in the wall street journal this morning -- rick? caller: it's like a bar tab. we are the runs that ran up the bartec. our grandchildren will ultimately have to pay it until we realize we have to stop drinking and start paying the bill, nothing will happen. host: what should happen to tax cuts? caller: it should not be one or the other. it should be all of the above. the rich should go back to the clinton era tax cuts where they did a fantastic. the middle class should pay a portion. everybody should pay something. the big elephant in the room is entitlements. we have to address health care. in the end, like it or not, we will go to a sing
a lot of leverage. i was a newly elected governor, i had a lot of political leverage and for various reasons i will not bore you with had the upper hand in the negotiations. i put the pedal to the metal. i won that round. however, the ill will that came from pushing to the other side was so strong that years later legislative leaders remembered how difficult that negotiation was and how unreasonable in their mind i was. we were still talking about payback six and seven years later in future negotiations. i share that -- as you think about not just this moment but the relationship between the congress and the president going forward. it is unclear whether there is enough republicans to support or even consider the rate increase generally, but at the very least i think they would want to see not just that question, but they would want to see what does it come with. i describe it as the two wings of the plane. people are working on one side, but not much discussion on the entitlement and structural spending reduction wing. republicans have put revenues on the table. there are lots of di
the re-election of the speaker? or do you think he should be fired? >> well, we're going to see how the next few weeks go and whether he is willing to make amends and put out that score card. let the american people see what he based the decision on. i think that's critical. we need to see what the decision was based on. the american people need to hear the truth. both sides need to work together. we've had enough of these games, partisan games in d.c. and enough of people sucking up to corporate lobbyists. we need to do what's right for the american people. >> that sounds like a no. >> i'm trying to figure out if it is a no. it is a yes/no question. if the vote were taken right now, would you support him or n not? >> right now i'm not very happy with the speaker. so let's see what happens over the next several weeks. let's put it that way. >> congressman justin amash, thank you for your time. we appreciate it. >> thank you, soledad. >> you bet. >>> gun culture in the nfl. bob costas took a lot of heat when he made comments about gun control. did he it in the middle of the a game. t
relationship, i don't think that that kind of thing -- >> what matters is japan does have election on the summer 16th. are they worried about china trying to put together a leader democracy in the region including india because that was his strategy that if you put together things, much more like your when you think, i know you can't in your position talk one way or another about prime minister but this notion about a strategic -- is japan really need to invest in structures that balance -- are you worried that given your experience you have to balance china much more vigorously than you did in the past? >> yes. most frequently you ask question for japanese people is whether we regard china as a threat or a chance for an hour and should is would like to see china development as a chance rather than threat. >> what you think will really happen? >> there is a assumption that china continues to be kind of international stakeholder, stakeholder, international community. international order and they respect the communication with the other countries. on the assumption i think we can wel
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)